Not really because it was just one example of what something might look like. This might be an example where there would be no foot traffic. Or that element wasn’t introduced in that example. There are several ideas on how to integrate bikes and pedestrians. Yes, it would probably sacrifice efficiency in areas where this is an issue. It would still be better than what we have.
2 Likes
another annoying obfuscation in the reporting:
And the shuttle didn’t have the ability to move back, either. Like, the shuttle just stayed still.”
because… there were vehicles or pedestrians behind it that were blocking it from backing-up, or because of a fault with the AI?
5 Likes
The machines are designed like star wars vehicles- fully combustible, with no debris
2 Likes
Yep, new technologies (and other ideas) are always held to a higher standard.
That isn’t always a problem, after all if they are being promoted as better they ought to be better. It runs into an issue if it is better in many many areas, and even a little worse in one area many critics ignore all the areas where it is better.
(NOTE: I don’t know that much about this shuttle, so “all the areas it is better” might be “(1) don’t need to pay a human driver, (2) people use our busses for novelty value!”, if so this is an even weaker article for not pointing out how flimsy the advantages were)
1 Like
“What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas”
3 Likes
I’m unaware of any traffic court that proportions responsibility based on tonnage of the vehicle.
It is normally based on what vehicle had the right of way, and to a far lesser extent to what vehicles could have avoided the accident, and also in rare cases to intent (if you have a green and floor it in order to “punish” a red light runner, you can be heard responsible, same as if you “break check” someone). So the moving truck v. stopped shuttle (with the shuttle being in the normal travel zone, and a truck backing out of a parking spot) in most cases would be found to be the truck’s fault, and in some cases would be partly the shuttle’s fault, but still mostly the truck’s fault.
(and by “truck’s fault” I mean “driver of the”)
3 Likes
The solution is better, more comprehensive rules of the road:
Don’t stop in the yellow box.
Giving people large amounts of discretion to apply subjective judgment is where an AI would fall down (don’t stop in major intersections… what’s a “major intersection”?). Give it more objective rules and it will do better.
4 Likes
I completely agree. The driver of the truck that backed into a parked shuttle full of passengers should have been properly tested to be sure that he wouldn’t drive a truck into a stationary vehicle. If this were a known vulnerability, he probably wouldn’t have that job.
Yes, I know that people make mistakes and s/he probably doesn’t deserve to get fired for this. After all nobody was hurt. But it’s just as silly to me that people think that incidents like this are an indictment of the entire self-driven vehicle concept, rather than an extremely minor incident that will probably be fixed in the next software patch. The driver will try hard, but under similar enough conditions may take the same (faulty) actions again. If the software is patched, under similar enough conditions it almost certainly won’t take the same (apparently too passive?) actions again.
6 Likes
I agree, that was part of my point. Now the self-driving car designers can consider whether to add a horn-honking algorithm to help reduce the likelihood of this kind of accident in the future.
7 Likes
This is going to be an increasing problem in a mixed autonomous/human environment: The machines will act logically and the humans will continue to drive with their head up their rump.
In time, there will grow a sport of “Let’s see if we can make the machine drive off the road or freeze up in heavy traffic” as well.
The transition period until such time as everything on the road must be automated will be difficult and increasingly dangerous.
4 Likes
The Russian model would have to have an android that jumps out and attacks the other driver/vehicle with a crowbar or axe.
5 Likes
How many more rules of the road are required for the AI to operate safely and effectively in an environment with humans?
What you’re describing is one of the major tasks involved in designing an AI.
as a pedestrian, i have to ask: well, which would you prefer? i oftentimes reach a corner and stand looking at my phone while i wait for traffic to clear so i can cross. i don’t WANT you to stop for me – i’m old enough to know to watch for traffic and cross when it’s clear. that being said, i do appreciate when people stop, but my point is i’m looking at my phone to give you a signal that i ain’t crossing in front of you, so you can just keep moving.
6 Likes
Meanwhile the shuttle AI is all worried that this is going to increase its insurance rates.
5 Likes
If you’re at a crosswalk without a light pedestrians have the right of way. They shouldn’t stand there waiting for traffic to clear, nor march across while staring at their phones. They should look at traffic and see that the cars see them before crossing. Both parties should know who has the right of way but neither should be utterly depending on the other for safety.
I know this is a romantic dream, in my city drivers have no idea what to do at a multi-way stop signs nevermind about giving way to pedestrians. The city placed little pylons in the road saying “stop for pedestrians” and half the morons think it’s a stop sign and stop when there’s no one there!
My wife thinks I’m an idiot for getting angry while driving, but I had to explain to her that there is a platonic ideal of traffic flow where everyone does what they’re supposed to because the rules exist to enable that to happen. But most people don’t seem to be able to comprehend something as simple as an alternate merge.
5 Likes
yes, true, but i can’t tell you the number of times i’ve stopped, waited for a car, they stop, and i start across only to have a car blow by me in the next lane, driver completely oblivious. i’d rather wait at the corner until there’s NO cars to deal with.
4 Likes
Fortunately we have very few if not no 4 lane streets with stop signs controlling them instead of lights, never mind with just a crosswalk and no stop.
Situations like Franko described are extremely common where I am.
In addition to ubiquitous four+ lane arterials meeting cross streets with (legal but unmarked) crosswalks at every intersection without lights or stop signs, there are two+ lane one way streets pretty much everywhere, and it is extremely common for someone to try to stop in the middle of one lane while the other lane is still zipping along.
I will absolutely also wait for traffic to clear as a pedestrian rather than demand my right of way to cross immediately.
4 Likes
Oh distracted walking is very much a thing, given how many times I’ve had to avoid people walking right out into the street because they couldn’t be bothered to look up from their phones. Or in fact the people I’ve had to avoid while walking because they were doing the same thing.
2 Likes
